View Poll Results: Are we an Arrogant country?

Voters
106. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    70 66.04%
  • No

    36 33.96%
Page 10 of 30 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 295

Thread: Are we an arrogant country?

  1. #91
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 01:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    Re: Are we an arrogant country?

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    I disagree that it was arrogant, we should have finished it the first time, as I've have said on this forum before, the timing is up for debate, but this was going to happen sooner or later.
    Not necessarily. Any number of events could of made Saddam irrelevant. Clinton put half-hearted efforts into undermining the man but like JFK got cold feet and botched the whole thing culminating in the failed 1996 attempt making Saddam clear his ranks of any perceived loyalty and destroying all intelligence sources for the near future.

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    Leaving it a mess was bad, but as destabalized as the middle east is I don't see any other alternatives to taking action.
    But we made the situation far worse. We hold the reins on Israel and the only thing stopping a president from using them is backlash from the pro-Israel lobby in the US.

    Israel had hedged their bets that the Christian militia could establish dominance and thus a friendly government in Lebanon could be established. However, things did not goes as planned. The result was the Christian militia slaughtering civilian Muslims claiming that they were PLO all while Israeli forces guarded the doors and the US military watched from the seas.

    In the end the Israel achieved a momentary reprieve from PLO and Hezbollah assault but sowed the seeds for future attacks by so effectively dismantling the government of Lebanon leaving a civil war to rage for the next decade where Hezbollah would eventually return in strength.

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    Yes it does, many brave service men suffered because of an optional intervention, plus, we were supporting the U.N., this wasn't of our doing.
    I think it was probably a good thing. Re-reading it, it should be off the list I created.

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    When they put missles in our neighbors borders, especially because of the harsh nature of our relationship at the time, it became our business.
    Were are talking about Georgia right?

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    True, however Egypt and Israel have a neutral relationship today at worst, and Egypt is friendly to us now, so it's a water under the bridge situation.
    And now the Arabs are left without a leader who could of brought wide ranging peace and stability. Nasir was this hope.

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    The middle eastern tension starts much before those conflicts however, even before WWII, however the M.E. problem really escalated because of the U.N. and it's territorial divide from the Nazi holdings post-war, it took decades to wash up on our shores, but it is here now and it must be dealt with.
    ME conflict has been around intensely since post WW2.

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    I never said we are perfect, however Cuba rightfully shouldn't get a dime legally from us until the cancer and his brother are no longer in control of that country, when a more representative government is in Cuba we can talk to them, however, I see no other solutions to the current embargo, painful as it is for both sides.
    I don't really have a solution. I wouldn't want the country to get stronger but it sucks punishing the people.
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

  2. #92
    Sage
    scourge99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    The Wild West
    Last Seen
    01-27-12 @ 01:50 AM
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,233

    Re: Are we an arrogant country?

    Quote Originally Posted by Grateful Heart View Post
    I can hardly waste your time. But it's possible that I am wasting mine. That's a conclusion I'll have to make.

    In a previous post you described two enemies of the U.S., communism and terrorism, as 'intentionally vague.' By that did you mean that the communist USSR, for instance, or the terrorist group al qaeda, were or are 'intentionally vague' in their ideologies and opposition to the U.S.? Or are you suggesting that our leaders have been 'intentionally vague' about these enemies?

    Was there anything 'vague' about Khrushchev's promise "Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will dig you in."?

    Was there anything 'vague' about the events of 9/11?

    ..
    I'm saying that its common procedure to establish a vague enemy so that tertiary goals can be achieved under its guise.

    That is, declare a "war on terror" and anybody that participates in terror (which includes just about any country with a military or intelligence agency) and you've got a lot of public support whenever you use your buzzword.

    Grenada - Communists! Democracy!

    Iraq - Terrorists! Democracy!

    Panama - Drugs! Democracy!

    The list goes on.

    This is not to say that many of these conflicts are not justifiable or needed but merely that the propaganda is... well, propaganda. The facts come later.... sometimes much later. Democracy!
    If you believe in the Supernatural then you can become a millionaire!

    Questioning or criticizing another's core beliefs is inadvertently perceived as offensive and rude.

  3. #93
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,473

    Re: Are we an arrogant country?

    [quote]
    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    Not necessarily. Any number of events could of made Saddam irrelevant. Clinton put half-hearted efforts into undermining the man but like JFK got cold feet and botched the whole thing culminating in the failed 1996 attempt making Saddam clear his ranks of any perceived loyalty and destroying all intelligence sources for the near future.
    I disagree in theory. Saddam proved that the more pressure we put on, the more brutal his tactics became, not saying you're wrong here, but my perception is that we had to lay the smack down eventually.

    But we made the situation far worse. We hold the reins on Israel and the only thing stopping a president from using them is backlash from the pro-Israel lobby in the US.

    Israel had hedged their bets that the Christian militia could establish dominance and thus a friendly government in Lebanon could be established. However, things did not goes as planned. The result was the Christian militia slaughtering civilian Muslims claiming that they were PLO all while Israeli forces guarded the doors and the US military watched from the seas.

    In the end the Israel achieved a momentary reprieve from PLO and Hezbollah assault but sowed the seeds for future attacks by so effectively dismantling the government of Lebanon leaving a civil war to rage for the next decade where Hezbollah would eventually return in strength.
    I don't think that situation could have been worse to be honest, Lebanon at that time was ****ed, pardon my french.

    I think it was probably a good thing. Re-reading it, it should be off the list I created.
    I disagree, the U.N. created a horrendous situation and we went in under their protocol, it was a horrendous mistake.

    Were are talking about Georgia right?
    Thought we were talking about Cuba, ooops. The Georgia situation is a little different, they were actually begging us to step in while Russia was warning the world and specifically our country against intervention.

    And now the Arabs are left without a leader who could of brought wide ranging peace and stability. Nasir was this hope.
    Unfortunately the only stabilizers right now are despots, that isn't good for the rest of us, once the seeds of stable democracy take root it will be fine, or at least a benevolent dictatorship, unfortunately it isn't safe for us as it is set up now.

    ME conflict has been around intensely since post WW2.
    correct.

    I don't really have a solution. I wouldn't want the country to get stronger but it sucks punishing the people.
    Can't argue that, it's a lose/lose at the moment.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  4. #94
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,618

    Re: Are we an arrogant country?

    Quote Originally Posted by Grateful Heart View Post
    Or maybe the Soviet Union and Communism would still be on the march around the world...
    And if it was, so what? That doesn't change what we have here, it was just a childish game of "I'm better than you."
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! The Bitchspot Blog YouTube me! The Bitchspot Channel

  5. #95
    Educator Grateful Heart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Last Seen
    12-27-09 @ 02:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,010

    Re: Are we an arrogant country?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    And if it was, so what? That doesn't change what we have here, it was just a childish game of "I'm better than you."
    Tell that to the citizens of East Germany, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia...


  6. #96
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,618

    Re: Are we an arrogant country?

    Quote Originally Posted by Grateful Heart View Post
    Tell that to the citizens of East Germany, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia...

    Most of whom accepted and even embraced the political system they lived under. We didn't "defeat" communism for them, we did it because Ronald Reagan had a spur up his ass and spent billions of dollars we didn't have fighting a war that wasn't really real.

    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! The Bitchspot Blog YouTube me! The Bitchspot Channel

  7. #97
    Educator Grateful Heart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Last Seen
    12-27-09 @ 02:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,010

    idea Re: Are we an arrogant country?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Most of whom accepted and even embraced the political system they lived under.

    Is it your assertion that martial law and revolution are the signs of a populace which accepts and embraces it's authoritarian government?

    As in neighboring countries, by 1989 the bulk of the Romanian populace was dissatisfied with the Communist regime. However, unlike other Eastern Bloc countries, Romania had never undergone even limited de-Stalinization.[citation needed] Ceauşescu's economic and development policies (including grandiose construction projects such as the Palace of the Parliament and a draconian austerity program designed to enable Romania to liquidate its entire national debt in only a few years) were generally blamed for the country's painful shortages and widespread, increasing poverty. Parallel with increasing poverty, the secret police (Securitate) were becoming so ubiquitous as to make Romania essentially a police state.
    [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_Revolution_of_1989"]Romanian Revolution 1989[/ame]



    The "Velvet Revolution" (Czech: sametová revoluce) or "Gentle Revolution" (Slovak: nežná revolúcia) (November 16 – December 29, 1989) refers to a non-violent revolution in Czechoslovakia that saw the overthrow of the Communist government.[1] It is seen as one of the most important of the Revolutions of 1989.

    On November 17, 1989 , a Friday, riot police suppressed a peaceful student demonstration in Prague. That event sparked a series of popular demonstrations from November 19 to late December. By November 20 the number of peaceful protesters assembled in Prague had swollen from 200,000 the previous day to an estimated half-million. A two-hour general strike, involving all citizens of Czechoslovakia, was held on November 27.
    [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velvet_Revolution"]The Velvet Revolution[/ame]


    Alarmed by the rapid deterioration of the PZPR's authority following the Gdańsk agreement, the Soviet Union proceeded with a massive military buildup along Poland's border in December 1980. In February 1981, Defense Minister Gen. Wojciech Jaruzelski assumed the position of Prime Minister, and in October 1981, was named First Secretary of the Communist Party. At the first Solidarity national congress in September–October 1981, Lech Wałęsa was elected national chairman of the union. Wojciech Jaruzelski declared martial law on December 13, 1981

    On December 12–13, the regime declared martial law, under which the army and ZOMO riot police were used to crush the union. Virtually all Solidarity leaders and many affiliated intellectuals were arrested or detained. The United States and other Western countries responded to martial law by imposing economic sanctions against the Polish regime and against the Soviet Union. Unrest in Poland continued for several years thereafter.
    [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Poland"]History of Poland[/ame]

    Last edited by Grateful Heart; 04-10-09 at 02:55 PM.

  8. #98
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Are we an arrogant country?

    Quote Originally Posted by scourge99 View Post
    I'm saying that its common procedure to establish a vague enemy so that tertiary goals can be achieved under its guise.

    That is, declare a "war on terror" and anybody that participates in terror (which includes just about any country with a military or intelligence agency) and you've got a lot of public support whenever you use your buzzword.

    Grenada - Communists! Democracy!

    Iraq - Terrorists! Democracy!

    Panama - Drugs! Democracy!

    The list goes on.

    This is not to say that many of these conflicts are not justifiable or needed but merely that the propaganda is... well, propaganda. The facts come later.... sometimes much later. Democracy!

    Interesting hypothesis. Totally wrong, but interesting.

    Grenada - independent
    Iraq - we can't wait to get rid of it
    Panama - indpendent, those parts that aren't owned by the Chicoms

    the list goes on.

  9. #99
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Are we an arrogant country?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Most of whom accepted and even embraced the political system they lived under. We didn't "defeat" communism for them, we did it because Ronald Reagan had a spur up his ass and spent billions of dollars we didn't have fighting a war that wasn't really real.

    Is that the latest spin from the left on their side's loss of the Cold War?

  10. #100
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Are we an arrogant country?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    The question isn't about what the Russians do, it's about how the United States acts. Regardless of Russia's actions, our responsibility for our actions is our own, we can't blame them and say two wrongs make a right. The fact is, both the US and USSR spent a great deal of the Cold War propping up sympathetic regimes and trying to impose their pet political systems worldwide in the bizarre belief that their way is automatically the best for everyone, screw the wishes of the native population.
    You don't agree that freedom is better than slavery?

    Also, we did what we needed to to do survive the threat the Soviet Union presented to us.

    Should we have let the Soviets conquer Afghanland, and thus have Russian troops on Iran's south eastern border, or should we have assisted the people who lived there who wanted to resist the invaders?

    Should we have let the Soviets establish a satellite state on the mainland of North America by rigging and stealing an election, or should we have assisted the people of Nicaragua in overthrowing the illegal usurpers?

    Should we have allowed the Chinese to back the North Korea communists overthrow the south, putting our dependent protectorate of Japan at risk of overthrow also, or should we have assisted the South Koreans defend their homeland?

    As one can tell from history, damn few people were eager to sneak into Russia, many were willing to risk their lives to get out.

    What's the matter with you people, anyway? Your side lost, so you want us to laugh at your sour grapes, is that it?

Page 10 of 30 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •